Following Nieto v. Fresno Beverage Co., Inc. (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 274, this decision holds that workers for a company 90% of whose business was providing “last mile” transportation of goods from Amazon warehouses to Amazon customers were employees in interstate commerce and thus exempt from the FAA.  Though the workers themselves did not cross state lines, they represented the final stage of the interstate transportation of goods from the seller through Amazon to the Amazon customer.  Thus, the FAA did not apply to the arbitration clause in the workers’ contract with their employer.  Gentry v. Superior Court (2007) 42 Cal.4th 443 remains good California law and in cases to which the FAA does not apply, like this one, it invalidates class action waivers where recoveries are small, persons in plaintiffs’ position are ill-informed of their rights and justifiably scared of retaliation if they sue individually.  However, the class action waiver can be severed to preserve the arbitration agreement insofar as the plaintiff asserts individual claims, as the plaintiff in this case did.  His individual claims for retaliation and wrongful termination should be sent to arbitration, while the court adjudicates his class claims for wage and hour violations.  Finally, though procedurally unconscionable, the arbitration clause is not substantively unconscionable under Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 83 standards, except for a severable provision barring any court review of the arbitrator’s award.